Frank commentary from an unretired call girl

Another Example of Swedish “Feminism”

You can’t protect women without handicapping them in competition with men. If you demand equality you must accept equality. Women can’t have it both ways. – Mary Bell-Richards

Sweden’s bizarre excuse for its continuing infantilization of women is “feminism”; supposedly, prostitution magically affects the brains of all males in a society, causing them to view women in a way Swedish neofeminists consider unacceptable. But judging by the way Swedish authorities treat women, that “unacceptable” view must be the idea that women are intelligent adults capable of independent thought and self-determination, because it’s clear that the official position is the opposite. In my column of December 18th I reported that though the rape rate in Sweden has quadrupled since the mid-‘90s (doubtlessly due, at least in part, to the suppression of prostitution), the conviction rate for rape is much lower than it was in 1965; as Naomi Wolf put it, “a woman who has been raped in Sweden is ten times more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer than she is of getting any kind of legal proceeding on her behalf undertaken by Swedish prosecutors.” How can this be reconciled with Sweden’s supposed promotion of feminism? As I expressed it in the linked column,

…the Swedish government only “promotes” feminism as a domineering pimp “promotes” a whore: As a commodity to be bought, sold or traded for its own purposes. Sweden views women as a natural resource to be exploited in much the same way as it exploits timber, hydropower and iron ore, and its leaders only mouth platitudes about “equality” to keep female Swedish voters happy so they can stay in power. Its dismal record on rape and its tyrannical efforts to reduce whores to slaves of its bloated welfare state demonstrate that Sweden doesn’t actually care about the welfare of individual women, but rather only about the political support of women collectively.

And since it does only care about women collectively, any individual women who step out of line must be dealt with ruthlessly, yet in such a way as to maintain the pretense of “feminism”. In my column of January 18th we saw that Sweden legally requires men to presume that women are prostitutes on the basis of their manner of dress (are you reading this, SlutWalkers?), and this May 19th story from The Local reveals what happens to Swedish whores who dare to speak about their (supposedly 100% legal) work in public:

A Swedish student who was trying to boost her finances by stripping and selling sexual favours has reported her adult education college for discrimination after being suspended for her “sick” behaviour. After being forced to find a way of paying her bills, the student started working at a Stockholm strip club and also worked part-time as a prostitute to make ends meet…In February, she found herself called in to a meeting with a teacher and the dean of her college, where she was surprised to find them asking her about her job. “They said that it goes against the school’s values and that students had been harmed by me being so open about what I do,” she wrote in the report. The dean and the teacher told her that what she did outside of school hours helped to support the view of women as sexual objects. “I said I have never felt like an object but rather found the whole experience pleasurable,” the student wrote in her report. According to the student, the teacher and dean were horrified with this statement and said that she had caused the whole class to go through a crisis by being so open with her choice of career. “You must have a problem if you think like that,” they said according to the student. Despite the student’s apologies and a willingness to give up her job to stay on at the college, the dean said that it was obvious she wasn’t feeling well, and that she therefore would not be allowed to continue. “I said ‘But I feel healthy’ and ‘I am passionate about this course’. Then the dean said ‘you seem passionate about a lot of things’ and looked me up and down,” the student wrote. After leaving the school she was told by fellow students that meetings had been taking place about her behind her back, and that the dean said that she had chosen to leave due to not feeling well. The student was allowed to come back and say goodbye to her friends. At the meeting she was allegedly told by the principal that she was not to mention anything about her suspension…she…tried to speak to several teachers, but was told by the dean to leave school premises as she wasn’t a student there any more. Since the suspension the student has given up her stripping job but has decided to report the school to the Swedish Equality Ombudsman…

Sound familiar? In my column of April 13th we saw the new prohibitionist tactic of pronouncing prostitutes mentally ill if they fail to see things as the prohibitionists want them to; that is exactly what happened here. In the Victorian Era, women who failed to behave like good little domestic robots were labeled “hysterical”, and now the Swedish state labels women who fail to behave like good little brainwashed neofeminist robots as “sick”. The Swedish sales pitch claims its repressive regime has not harmed prostitutes in any way; try telling that to the young woman who was expelled for talking about her supposedly-legal job. It also claims that the majority of Swedes enthusiastically support the ban, yet articles like this one appear frequently in Swedish publications. Clearly, Sweden’s official claims about the “success” of its disgusting, tyrannical imposition of radical neofeminism on the Swedish people are no more true than its claim that the reason for the outrage is the promotion of “equality” for women.

55 Responses

I understand that you are primarily focused on the “Swedish Model” of prostitution here, and thus inclined to view the Rape statistics through that prism, but I think there is another explanation for the grotesque rise in rape in Sweden AND the lack of prosecution. Sweden made the mistake of allowing large numbers of Islamic refugees into the country, and the passage of the last few decades has seen a rise in Islamic barbarism toward women in all countries with significant Islamic minorities, and a notable lack of spine on the part of those countries when it comes to prosecuting Islamic rapists and murderers.

There was a time, Goddamnit, when if the most slatternly Whitechapel whore was raped and murdered by some camel pestering swine who claimed the Qur’an as his justification, the authorities would have publicly hanged the bastard …. assuming that the cockney mob didn’t simply tear him limb from limb. Maybe that was a sign of racism … but I don’t see the present situation as a net improvement. The Swedes did not used to be this soft in the head, either. The older I get the more I am inclined to think that “Transnational Cosmopolitan” is fancy talk for “too chicken to stand up to Barbarians”. The Colonialists may have bee racist swine, but at least some of them were capable of holding the “Natives” to objective standards (re, for example, hanging people who burned widows). The modern sensitive types apparently can’t do this.

You certainly may be right about the cause, but regardless of the “why” the fact is that if Sweden really cared about individual women it would be deploying its police to investigate rapes rather than arresting the clients of prostitutes.

In the 19th Century various “Christian” organizations concerned themselves with a great deal that was none of their goddamned business, treating people they disagreed with like children or animals, and generally riding roughshod over other people’s civil rights in order to feel morally superior.

In the 20th (and so far in the 21st) Century various “Liberal” organizations concerned themselves with a great deal that was none of their goddamned business, treating people they disagreed with like children or animals, and generally riding roughshod over other people’s civil rights in order to feel morally superior.

The major difference between the 19th Century “Christian” buttinskis and the 20th Century “Liberal” buttinskis is that the “Christians” have a Holy Book that you could actually get hold of, read, and argue with them over. Despite passing enthusiasms for one text or another, the “Liberals” seem to be making their “morality” up as they go along.

None of the above is intended to besmirch genuine Christians, genuine Liberals, or the actual (and often very badly needed) good works that both have done.

Dear CPS, THANK YOU for bringing up the Christians who DON’T spend all their spare time ordering others around! That’s VERY needed on here plus many other websites and offline also. The Christians who really DO what they’re supposed to, working on their problems/faults, working to be the best they can, truly helping others, etc., should be talked about MORE and thank you for doing that.

And also thanks for pointing out that not every liberal is… whatever it is you were talking about.

I do suspect that a lot of the raging against “liberals” is a tendency for those who do not like liberals to assume that anything ELSE they don’t like must, by default, also be the doings of “liberals.”

I’m close enough to the left to know that they sometimes do the same thing with conservatives: somebody wants to let the gub’mint tap your phone w/o a warrant? Those damned conservatives!!! Except of course that there’s nothing conservative about making such a huge change all at once, all that extra government spending, and giving government all that extra power.

Nothing liberal about such restrictions either. Some things are neither liberal nor conservative, but are sure enough WRONG.

The rape statistic caught my eye as well. I’m not sure I buy the notion that it’s due to an influx of immigrants, though. Sweden has double the reported rape cases of the UK and four times the number of Germany and France. Can’t speak for Germany because I couldn’t be arsed to look it up, but the UK and France have also had a huge influx of Islamic immigrants. Comparable demographics logically should lead to comparable statistics; this case isn’t even close, therefore I have to doubt demographics causing the statistics.

I suspect Sweden’s definition of rape might be a more likely culprit. Their inclusion of a profoundly vague “helpless victim” clause means consensual sex can and is turned into non-consensual after the fact. If a woman is drunk, it is rape. A woman who sleeps with her boss and later regrets it, magically morphs into a victim of rape. Pulling on your date’s arm constitutes rape by force or threat of force. A condom breaking or falling off during consensual sex instantly turns the act into rape.

Taking that into account, it becomes less mystifying that rape reports are through the roof while actual prosecution rates are among the worst in the world. You can call anything rape, but you still have to convince the court to convict.

Yes, I suspect the definition is at fault as well. Of course, this is also a problem, though from a different angle; back in the early ’90s, when feminists started stretching the word “rape” to mean almost anything at all, I very vocally disagreed because, as I pointed out, calling “buyer’s remorse” or adult women having sex with older teenage boys “rape” is just going to dilute the meaning of the word and cause many people to dismiss the reports of real rape victims.

Emily is right. Amnesty International specifically stated that sweden’s rape rate is difficult to compare to other countries because of their generous definition of rape and that the list every incident separately. I remember this because I specifically disputed one of the Naomi’s — Wolf or Klein or both — when they tried to defend Julian Assange and smear his accusers as CIA plants.

It makes no difference what religion the rapist is, rape is rape. If you have statistics to back up your assertion that most rapes in Sweden are committed by Muslims, then by all means provide them. But if you don’t, then your assertion is just your opinion.

The source is a conservative news channel. Half the report was an interview with one victim. If Norway’s definition of rape is as sweeping as Sweden’s, a ‘rape’ in Norway might be considered ‘groping’ in the States. Yes, groping is bad, but it’s nowhere near as traumatizing as rape.
The news clip was scanty on statistics. This is not a substantial enough report to be credible to me.

You know, I’m trying to figure out how this could be even remotely relevant, in a manner which still assumes we’re all of us bright people with critical thinking skills, and I’m failing. Let me get back to you when I’ve finished my coffee.

For one, I am deeply suspicious of conservatives. The entire conservative agenda is about punishment, at least here in the States. The liberals aren’t far behind, both parties trying to regulate everything we think, say, watch and do. It may have no relevance to you but it does to me.

Personally, I really don’t care what a control freak is motivated by; trying to control others for reasons of “morality” is no more or less onerous than trying for reasons of “safety” or “social progress”. I feel the same way about “hate crime” laws; why should I care if I’m murdered in furtherance of robbery, rape or racial vendetta? I’m equally dead no matter what. And if some evil moral retard tells me I can’t practice my profession, why should I care if it’s because his holy book says it’s “sinful” or his holy book says it’s “demeaning to women”? It’s authoritarian nonsense either way. 😦

A quick note about hate crimes: if I kill Shelly Sue because I want her money, or because she wouldn’t put out for me, or because I just like to kill, that’s a crime against Shelly Sue. If I kill Shelly Sue because she’s black, or because she’s a Buddhist, or because she’s a hooker, and then I write “NIGGER DIE NIGGER DIE” in her blood on the sidewalk (or HEATHEN DIE HEATHEN DIE or WHORE DIE WHORE DIE), then I’m not just targeting Shelly Sue; I’m targeting blacks, Buddhists, or prostitutes. I’m attempting to not only kill one person, but to intimidate an entire group of people.

It’s kind of like: if get into an argument with Shelly Sue and lose my temper and break her neck vs. if I get into an argument with Shelly Sue and keep calm and come back five days later with a blowgun and a poison dart and kill her that way. I get a harsher sentence for the planned murder than for the heat-of-the-moment murder.

Shelly Sue? She’s just as dead one way or the other. Doesn’t make a lot of difference to her whether I blew my stack or coldly planned it out.

Intimidation is ALREADY a crime. Writing “die whore die” is a separate issue, punctuated by the juxtaposition of the murder, and should be considered as such. That still doesn’t justify greater penalties for the so-called “hate crime” itself, nor make me any less wary of granting prosecutors the official ability to claim that they can read minds. If prosecutors are given a tool to inflict greater sentences on people, they will use it whether the evidence fits or not because they can; the only way to prevent this is by removing their ability to do so.

Or do you really believe that all those people whose assets are seized under the “drug lord law” actually paid for all the stuff that was stolen with “drug profits”?

How about the differing sentences for planned vs. heat-of-the-moment murder?

I can see an argument either way for hate crimes, but I did think it needed to be pointed out that the harsher sentence isn’t so much for “thinking bad things” as for the larger targeting of an entire group. If there’s a better way to deal with that, well then that’s an argument I can consider.

I suspect that even a “drug lord” who buys a lot of stuff with money made selling drugs probably has a few things that were given him by a non-drug-lord friend, his mommy, etc.

But he DIDN’T target the entire group; he targeted one person. And he didn’t affect the entire group, either, even with modern communications. “Hate crime”is a fuzzy-headed feel-good concept which has not been thought through to its logical conclusion; what next, a robber charged with “hate crime” under the rationale that he targeted the entire group of people who have stuff he wants? Radical feminists have proposed (by the same logic) that rape is a “hate crime” which targets all women. And once the original collectivist bullshit premise (that individuals exist most importantly as representatives of groups) is accepted, their argument is totally logical.

I disagree that he didn’t target the entire community. Oh yes he did; he just couldn’t get them all. He is trying to scare the ones he can’t kill. Just become some weren’t scared (because they’re brave, dumb, didn’t know they were being targeted, etc.) doesn’t mean he wasn’t targeting them. You can miss a target.

Whether or not modern hate crimes laws are the best way to deal with this is another question.

Because there’s more to murder than just the single person that was wronged. I believe the words are “tort” and “felony” – commission of a felony makes a person a threat to society in general.

Maggie Thatcher once said: “there is no such thing as society. There are individuals and there are families”. The obvious rejoinder is, “What does a prime minister do? Where does a prime-minister’s authority to make and enforce laws come from? Specifically, whence the right to force people who do not choose to consent to laws, to obey them?”

Emily’s got some good points. Has their been an increase in *real* rapes, or just a statistic inflated by an ever broader array of bogus definitions of rape, such as the one that Julian Assange is on trial for?

As for “convincing the court to convict”, I would love to believe that juries are increasingly saying NO to these cases, but I haven’t seen any evidence of it. Somehow I doubt that jurors are allowed to hear about how defendants like Assange are being railroaded.

I suspect the rape stats are inflated – part of the expansion of the definition of “rape” to include social crimes that would never have been considered before. That’s part of the same neofeminist agenda: Make the problem seem titanic and make as many men as possible guilty, because all men are guilty anyway.

Also, immigration. Don’t discount this. The same effect has been noted in Canada and New Zealand. One Canadian social scientist I worked with said that immigrants – mostly refugees were largely responsible for the rise in rape stats. And most of these were Muslim.

How this would be even remotely shocking to anyone is beyond me. My reaction: Well, D’uh.

If you know anything about Muslims, this sort of thing is exactly what you’d expect.

But this from Norway: 100% of identified rape suspects are immigrants; it’s unsaid, but likely mostly Muslim.

“If you know anything about Muslims”…really? You mean the evil stereotypes/blanket statements like: They’re all terrorists. The men are ALL rapists and ALL of them beat women. The women ALL have horrible, repressed sex lives and when they do have sex they just lie there and wait for it to be over (This ###*** is spewed about Christian women also). When they’re NOT doing terrorist acts, they’re out ordering everyone around to be just like them (just like those horrible Christians…eyeroll). They also spend some time plotting NEW terrorist acts. Funny, but I have a dear Internet family member who lived in Muslim countries for a number of years and never met 1 Muslim that this ###*** applied to. The ###*** about Muslims got so bad on her message board that she had to shut certain topics down. Isn’t that WONDERFUL? I was defending the Muslims along with her and a few others. Yes, a small group of us made an impact! Small groups can’t do that…they don’t count, etc. RIGHT! We did on this board and things have gotten way better in this area. Are there some Muslim rapists? YES! Are there also American, Chinese, Spanish, etc., etc., rapists? YES! None of these groups deserve the ###*** blanket statements about rapists.

I don’t hate Muslims at all. Yet the male attitude of Middle Eastern Muslims is that any woman who dresses provocatively is asking for it. Therefore they perpetuate their own stereotypes.
“Sluttishly” dressed women are asking for it – this is the same attitude American males had up until about 1960. This is about mind-sets, not religion. The Koran doesn’t support rape at all (rapists are executed).

Except ofcourse for the prophet who raped a nine year old, and several others, he wanst executed.

And I think your confused, because in the last several stories I read regarding rape comming out of the middle east the only person executed who was involved in a rape were the victims of rape, stoned or whipped to death for sexual impropriety

It is a cultural thing, rapes are disproportionatly high in polygamus societies, so is war, and violent crime.

The fact that Islam is predicated upon aboslute athourity that can never be questioned and was created by a misogonistic, child raping, cowerdly, warlord born into a resource poor area of the world that was rarely ever able to socially evole past the equivelent of an inbreed street gang tribal system really doesnt help matters

Its amazing how many of societies problems boil down to sex, or a lack thereof

It was a hyperbolic tongue-in-cheek remark popularized on a site I used to frequent. One of these days I’m going to learn to stop with inside jokes, as no one but me understands them. (That, and “How ’bout them Bears?” I am truly shocked at the number of people who don’t watch SNL. No cultural appreciation.)

No, we mean the parts of the Koran, the sayings of Mohammed, and the consistent opinion of Islamic scholarship for the last one and a half millenia that specifically state that it is a muslim’s duty to kill the infidel, and that its perfectly ok to raping his women while doing this.

In my column of December 18th I reported that though the rape rate in Sweden has quadrupled since the mid-‘90s (doubtlessly due, at least in part, to the suppression of prostitution)

While I’m fully in favor of reasonably discreet or zoned prostitution being legal everywhere, and also men paying prostitutes (which is what Sweden makes illegal), most observers of the great increase in Swedish rape primarily to the great increase of Muslim immigrants since that time, mostly asylum seekers on Swedish welfare. Lots of Iraqis.

Yeah, other commenters suggested the same thing. Y’all may certainly be right, but I still feel that if those Swedish cops assigned to chase whore’s clients were instead sent after rapists, the rate wouldn’t be so high and the conviction rate so low. 😦

It makes me sad to see people using Maggie’s blog to rant about “camel pestering swine” and “child raping” prophets. Maggie’s a big girl and can take care of herself, and I wouldn’t have any way to enforce any sort of “knock it off, guys” demand anyway.

But I really wish you would. I happen to like Maggie, and don’t like it when this sort of mud is tracked into her house.

i was expert witness for julian assange before his recent british extradition trial, not sneering at anyone’s in-progress rape legislation but seeing how notions of what is real and what is progressive don’t jibe correctly.

i know why you get hyperbolic about ‘sweden’ but you do vastly over-simplify!

I followed the link and read your article. Thank you. It plainly states that most rapes in Sweden are between people who know each other. I’m willing to bet that Middle Easterners are going to have a very hard time grasping the concept that you are not allowed to rape your wife (or girlfriend).

That’s exactly why I encourage my readers to explore further on subjects which interest them. I do tend to simplify things; I am, after all, just providing “introductions” to these topics for many people who would be daunted by academic papers and heavy analysis (at least at first). What I’m trying to do is get people interested, make them realize they’ve been lied to by the media and “anti-prostitution” crusaders, then encourage them to dig more deeply in columns like yours by linking them, and re-calling attention to them in the columns once in a while. 🙂

There has always been a high rape rate among northern climates. I’m not sure if any research had been done why. In the US, Alaska has the highest rape rate out of all 50 states–much higher, in fact. Canada has a rape rate that is nearly 3x that of the US. Scandinavia has the highest rape rate in Europe, comparable to that of Canada’s. I’m guessing the arctic regions of Russia also have a high rape rate. Does the high rate of alcohol consumption in these cold climes have anything to do with the huge rape rate? Just curious.

Iceland has twice the rape rate of any other country in Europe. Very interesting! I think the high alcohol consumption may indeed have something to do with it, considering that Iceland (and I believe other Scandinavian countries) actually considers alcohol-related manslaughter to be a separate crime from manslaughter committed while sober.

Up until modern times English common law was quite concerned with the drunk as potential victim. Tlhat’s why no one can consent to a contract while drunk. People then were aware of the fadt that drunks and crazy people were not as responsible as sober people for the same crimes. France still has ‘crimes of passion’ for people who kill in a violent rage. This shift came about because of Protestantism, which saw all people as hopelessyl sinful and depraved, drunk or not.;

I’ve read that Muslim immigration was the source of the increase in stranger rapes in Norway. Also that gang rapes in Scandinavia were much, much less common than they are since the governments decided to import Islam.
The government in Sweden seems to be made up of idiots. There isn’t real free speech or freedom of the press and they have a nanny state mentality.
As far as prostitution, if that’s a woman’s choice and it doesn’t damage her then it’s her business.
There’s a difference between an adult woman choosing to do something and being forced into it by Muslim Somalis as young American girls were in Ohio, Minnesota and Tennessee.
To those who would defend Islam why not move to Saudi Arabia and see how you like it there?

Joe, the danger in the “if it doesn’t damage her” clause is that the government can define “damage” any way it likes. If I own something it’s my right to do anything I like with it, up to and including its total destruction; I own my body, and if I choose to “damage” it by tattooing, piercing, or anything else it’s nobody’s business but my own. In the US we allow police to beat, maim and even kill people in the name of “protecting” them from drugs, and it’s only recently that politicians and the general public seem to be recognizing that as a totally insane concept.

The definitions of rape have also been highly skewed, now if you do not agree all the time with your spouse it can be constituted as psychological aggression.
Aggression = Rape -> according to feminists
Everything is rape, but, the legal standard is simple, rape is when you are forced to have sex against your will.
Not like you were looking for fun and drank a bit more than you could handle, found an equally drunk male, have consensual drunk sex and then call it rape in the morning – drunk men are somehow responsible but the woman is a victim…

Also real aggression against women is also going down, however domestic abuse against men is actually on the rise.
The truth is the human species is violent, you start breaking someone’s balls and continue up to the point of rupture and then you get slapped, you slap somebody and you should expect to be slapped back. This happens with both men and women.
It is silly for women to believe they should not be hit when they instantiate violence. Someone slaps me and I will slap the person back, male or female – equality and all.

Whorish Media

Maggie on Twitter

Boring but necessary legal stuff

All original content on this website (i.e. all of my columns, pages and anything else which I write myself) is protected under international copyright law as of the time it is posted; though you may link to it as you please or quote passages (as long as you attribute the quote to me), please do not reproduce whole columns without my express written permission. In other words, you have to say "pretty please with sugar on top" first, and then wait for me to say "okey-dokey".